or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc... - Page 3861  

post #57901 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert S View Post

http://www.brooksbrothers.com/Calfskin-Form-Lace-Ups/MH00056,default,pd.html?dwvar_MH00056_Color=BLCK&contentpos=48&cgid=0522

Brooks Brothers has this shoe on sale without labeling (labeled only as "Calfskin Form Lace-Ups") though the interior shot of the shoe says, "Peal & Co." On sale now for $313 (regular price $448).

It looks remarkably like Allen Edmond's Carlyle shoe, though. Does AE make shoes under the Peal & Co. name for BB?

It's probably Loake. CJ used to make Peal, I think.
post #57902 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troilus View Post

Here's a photo.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

It looks like paint chipping. I've worn them less than 10 times.

Wow. That's ridiculous. Have you contacted AE?

The first thing I'd do is take better photos and nicely ask their opinion on this fiasco.
post #57903 of 70737

Thinking of getting a pair of McAllisters (to take advantage of the upcoing sale) and pair of Dalton seconds.

I can't make up my mind on the color of the McA's, as I am torn between merlot, brown and bourbon. I currently work in a business casula environment, wearing chinos or wool trousers, but that can change anytime, requiring that I wear a suit 5days/week. I like the merlot, but I am just not sure if I'd wear it with anything other than navy and charcoal/grey suit, let alone wearing with chinos, etc. I kind of like the bourbon color (however, I was reserving it for Mora's or Daltons). I don't have any shoes in this color and it seems that it will work well with bus. casual (i.e. chinos) and slightly lighter colored. suits.

 

What do you all think?

 

Thanks

post #57904 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc808314 View Post

Thinking of getting a pair of McAllisters (to take advantage of the upcoing sale) and pair of Dalton seconds.
I can't make up my mind on the color of the McA's, as I am torn between merlot, brown and bourbon. I currently work in a business casula environment, wearing chinos or wool trousers, but that can change anytime, requiring that I wear a suit 5days/week. I like the merlot, but I am just not sure if I'd wear it with anything other than navy and charcoal/grey suit, let alone wearing with chinos, etc. I kind of like the bourbon color (however, I was reserving it for Mora's or Daltons). I don't have any shoes in this color and it seems that it will work well with bus. casual (i.e. chinos) and slightly lighter colored. suits.

What do you all think?

Thanks
Merlot or Brown. Btw, Merlot is more versatile than you may think. J
post #57905 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR Magat View Post
 


Thanks for posting the link!  Unfortunately, nothing that I am interested in at the moment.  I'll check online on Friday to see if there are any surprises

 

Anyone have or tried on the Road Warriors line?  I'm curious how they feel on feet and how they look in person.  I might have to check them out at the AE store some time; might be interested in the LGA for a work shoe when I photograph weddings.


I saw the ORD tonight at my local store.  Couldn't try it on - I'm willow so for them to get in my size takes an act of god.  It felt sort of weird, like a jack Nicklaus golf shoe - similar to that.

post #57906 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeharo View Post

Does anyone have sizing advice for the Randolph? Searching does not give any clear results. I would love to hear your experiences. That style of shoe is tough for me because of how critical the fit of the vamp is. Anyway, any insight on Randolph sizing is appreciated. Thank-you.

I'll give this my best shot; I'll use a few references for comparison.  The Randolph is sort of my nemesis - believe it or not, I actually tried it on multiple times, in multiple sizes, at different times of the day (early vs. late at night), in standard calf and in shell.  That's how much I wanted them to work, but they didn't.

 

In almost everything I wear my brannock measured size minus 0.5 in length.  With AE's loafers, my biggest issue is the top of the shoe pressing down and killing me due to high arches.  I'll run through my own experience - yours will differ but this will give you a starting point.

 

I couldn't wear the Maxfield due to the issue I noted.  Probably because of the softer leather, the Nashua has been ok for me, even though it is also on the 114.  [Off topic but in the 114 I take my measured size exactly.]

 

The Patriot (606) fit like a glove - the toebox was sufficient - not super roomy but enough room, the heel was just right, and the top didn't kill me like the Maxfield.  But these things sure are plain looking.

 

The Grayson (97) is a weird fit - it is very tapered in the toebox and large in the heel - a strange combination.  Since the top doesn't bother me at all with this, it is passable.  I found that the heel slippage goes away almost completely when they are broken in.  They aren't the best fit in the world, but they look pretty damn good.

 

So I think of the "flagship" standard loafers AE continues to produce, the Randolph is probably the best looking - people have compared it to the Patriot but it is much better looking.  However, the fit of the 79 last just doesn't work for me.  That issue with the top pressing down wasn't terrible with the Randolph but it was certainly what I would call moderate.  The heel felt large, maybe not Grayson large, but overly large for me.  The toebox also felt like it had too much room.  The size felt like the correct size (meaning it was the optimal length and width), it was just that the overall shape didn't work.  When I walked in them it was sort of awkward, and they bent in such a way that it pinched as I walked (don't know how to explain this too well).  I tried on the Cody at one point and remember them fitting really similar to the Randolph.

 

Now comparing to the 234 last (I tried the Dornoch and the McGraw), this was just bad everywhere.  The heel and toebox were humungous, like they were designed for bozo the clown.  I guess if it was between one of these and the Randolph, the Randolph would win.

 

Hope this helps - if you can't get to try the Randolph but can try the Patriot, do it - if the Patriot doesn't fit, you're probably good with the Randolph.

post #57907 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I'll give this my best shot; I'll use a few references for comparison.  The Randolph is sort of my nemesis - believe it or not, I actually tried it on multiple times, in multiple sizes, at different times of the day (early vs. late at night), in standard calf and in shell.  That's how much I wanted them to work, but they didn't.

In almost everything I wear my brannock measured size minus 0.5 in length.  With AE's loafers, my biggest issue is the top of the shoe pressing down and killing me due to high arches.  I'll run through my own experience - yours will differ but this will give you a starting point.

I couldn't wear the Maxfield due to the issue I noted.  Probably because of the softer leather, the Nashua has been ok for me, even though it is also on the 114.  [Off topic but in the 114 I take my measured size exactly.]

The Patriot (606) fit like a glove - the toebox was sufficient - not super roomy but enough room, the heel was just right, and the top didn't kill me like the Maxfield.  But these things sure are plain looking.

The Grayson (97) is a weird fit - it is very tapered in the toebox and large in the heel - a strange combination.  Since the top doesn't bother me at all with this, it is passable.  I found that the heel slippage goes away almost completely when they are broken in.  They aren't the best fit in the world, but they look pretty damn good.

So I think of the "flagship" standard loafers AE continues to produce, the Randolph is probably the best looking - people have compared it to the Patriot but it is much better looking.  However, the fit of the 79 last just doesn't work for me.  That issue with the top pressing down wasn't terrible with the Randolph but it was certainly what I would call moderate.  The heel felt large, maybe not Grayson large, but overly large for me.  The toebox also felt like it had too much room.  The size felt like the correct size (meaning it was the optimal length and width), it was just that the overall shape didn't work.  When I walked in them it was sort of awkward, and they bent in such a way that it pinched as I walked (don't know how to explain this too well).  I tried on the Cody at one point and remember them fitting really similar to the Randolph.

Now comparing to the 234 last (I tried the Dornoch and the McGraw), this was just bad everywhere.  The heel and toebox were humungous, like they were designed for bozo the clown.  I guess if it was between one of these and the Randolph, the Randolph would win.

Hope this helps - if you can't get to try the Randolph but can try the Patriot, do it - if the Patriot doesn't fit, you're probably good with the Randolph.

Wow, thank-you very much for taking the time to send this response. Very helpful, thank-you.
post #57908 of 70737

Anyone have pictures of Walnut Harrisons?  I've been searching the thread and have seen Rutledge, but not Harrison.  On shoebank the Rutledge looks nicely burnished, the Harrison looks plain walnut.  I'm really interested at the price point.  

 

I wear a suit everyday and burnished i think is ok, plain walnut is too loud for work.


Edited by Jmm722 - 4/6/15 at 7:05pm
post #57909 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGKIII View Post
 

This post from a while back seems appropriate. Additionally, I have brogue Strands and a bitter chocolate Quentin, and there's definitely a noticeable variation (think bourbon vs. dark brown). From what I can tell, the snuff is still lighter.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hp5273 View Post
 


I have Strands in bitter chocolate and Neumoks and McGregors (acquired during the Nordstrom sale) in snuff.

 

Bitter chocolate is dark brown while snuff is a red-ish medium brown, there's no mistaking which is which.

 

I also have the Ralph Lauren Slatons in 'brown' suede which are manufactured by Allen Edmonds and appear

to be in another shade of brown that is somewhere in between snuff and chocolate, there's no red to it at all.

 

Some representative pictures of the shades... bitter chocolate:

 

Snuff:


brown:

Pics of the mcgregors without and then with flash, the without photo better representing the way it looks in person and walnut strands for comparison.  

 

The box reads snuff suede but, these have to be chocolate right?

post #57910 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by hohneokc View Post

I wanted to share my 201 last fit experience for anybody considering the Rogue or Warwick. I cannot guaranty you will have the same experience, but I wanted to share for some guidance.

I wear 9.5D in 95% of my AE's. The only exception is 9D in 1 pair McTavish, 1 pair Black Hills, and 1 pair Odenwald.

I tried both the Warwick and the Rogue at my local menswear / shoe store and in both the cases the 9D fit me best. The 9.5D was too big, especially in the toebox area. The 9.5D felt as if there would be some bad creasing due to excess space in the toebox.

Of the Warwick and Rogue (both 9D), the Rogue fit me best. The Warwick fit well but was tighter across the instep. Please note, I have a relatively high instep.

Chris

Interesting. I wear 9.5E in the 108 and 5 lasts, and probaby could do 9.5EE in the 108. Was swimming in the 9.5E warwick. Have a 9.5D on order, will see how that goes.

I'm also not fully sold on the oxblood warwicks. They look great on the shelf and in pics but I wonder how versatile they are with such a bulky strap, for more formal settings.
post #57911 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by peppercorn78 View Post

It's probably Loake. CJ used to make Peal, I think.
Agree with this assessment. Made in England and it's at the right price point.
post #57912 of 70737

Browsing the AE website, it appears that my second-hand Ashtons are recraftable.  The generic recrafting form also offers the option of changing the sole type.  Does anyone know if they can replace the rubber soles with leather?  Thanks in advance.

post #57913 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by hp5273 View Post
 


I have Strands in bitter chocolate and Neumoks and McGregors (acquired during the Nordstrom sale) in snuff.

 

Bitter chocolate is dark brown while snuff is a red-ish medium brown, there's no mistaking which is which.

 

I also have the Ralph Lauren Slatons in 'brown' suede which are manufactured by Allen Edmonds and appear

to be in another shade of brown that is somewhere in between snuff and chocolate, there's no red to it at all.

 

Some representative pictures of the shades... bitter chocolate:

 

Snuff:


brown:

 

I would like to take this opportunity to say that I've always liked the photographs of the shoes on the Ralph Lauren website.  They may not have as many angles as the AE photos, but the quality is quite obviously superior.  There are, however, users on this board who consistently do better than both.

post #57914 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by BespokeBrooklyn View Post

Do you still have the Black Hills? I'm considering buying a pair from the Shoe Bank and was wondering how they've held up and what you think of the walnut color (which seems a bit darker than the regular walnut color Allen Edmonds uses).

I can't answer to how they hold up as mine was a recent purchase, but they do seem pretty durable. I bought mine to wear to work (business casual) on bad weather days, weekends and for outdoor use. They fit that nicely. Not very dressy at all. Some of the pictures I've seen seem like a consistent walnut. Mine were not that way. They were much more burnished to give them a bit of a weathered look.
post #57915 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmwseller View Post






Pics of the mcgregors without and then with flash, the without photo better representing the way it looks in person and walnut strands for comparison.  

The box reads snuff suede but, these have to be chocolate right?

My snuff suede Strands are exactly like those; the chocolates are darker.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc...